[Critical illness myopathy. Neurophysiological and muscular biopsy assessment in 33 patients]. / Miopatia del enfermo crítico. Valoracion neurofisiológica y biopsia muscular en 33 pacientes.

INTRODUCTION: Critical illness patients may show marked weakness acquired in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). There are some disagreements about the myopathic versus neuropathic damage in this condition, presumably due to the lack of reliable diagnostic criteria. AIMS: To report the neurophysiological findings in critical patients, to classify them in groups according to the electro-physiological data of myopathy, and to ascertain the rapport between the neurophysiological classification of myopathy and the muscle biopsy results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective assessment of 33 ICU patients with marked weakness by means of needle electro-myography, electroneurography, and percutaneous muscle biopsy was carried out. Direct muscle stimulation was performed in 9 patients and repetitive nerve stimulation in 14 cases. RESULTS. According to neurophysiological criteria, patients were classified in 3 groups: definite (33%), probable (46%), and uncertain (21%) myopathy. The most conspicuous myopathic pathological findings including fibrillar atrophy and necrosis, vacuoles, and myosin and mitochondrial anomalies, were observed in both, definite and probable groups (26 patients). In 17 of these cases, low amplitude of the compound motor action potentials and normal sensory nerve action potentials were found. Axonal sensory-motor neuropathy was present in 11 patients, concomitant with neurophysiological data of myopathy in 7 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the neurophysiological criteria for the assessment and classification of acquired weakness in critically ill patients, myopathy is highly predominant over the neuropathic impairment. Histopathological findings are closely related to the electrophysiological diagnosis of myopathy. Neither neurophysiological nor pathological data support a hypothetic motor axonal neuropathy in this series.

Miopatía del enfermo crítico. Valoración neurofisiológica y biopsia muscular en 33 pacientes / Critical illness myopathy. Neurophysiological and muscular biopsy assessment in 33 patients

Introducción. Los enfermos críticos pueden desarrollar cuadros de debilidad importante en la Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos (UCI). Debido a la diversidad de criterios diagnósticos utilizados, existe desacuerdo sobre el origen miopático o neuropático de este cuadro. Objetivos. Describir las alteraciones neurofisiológicas de enfermos críticos, establecer grupos de pacientes según los datos electrofisiológicos de miopatía y determinar su correspondencia con los resultados de la biopsia muscular. Pacientes y métodos. Se estudiaron prospectivamente 33 pacientes en UCI con debilidad importante, mediante electromiografía, electroneurografía y biopsia muscular percutánea. En nueve casos se amplió el estudio con estimulación muscular directa y en 14 con estimulación repetitiva. Resultados. Aplicando criterios neurofisiológicos de miopatía, se describieron tres grupos de pacientes: miopatía definida (33%), miopatía probable (46%) y miopatía incierta (21%). En la biopsia muscular, las alteraciones miopáticas más intensas, con atrofia y necrosis fibrilar, vacuolas y alteraciones miosínicas y mitocondriales, se observaron en los grupos con miopatía definida y probable (26 casos). En 17 de ellos, los potenciales de acción muscular compuestos fueron de baja amplitud y los potenciales de acción del nervio sensitivo normales. Once pacientes mostraron polineuropatía axonal sensitivomotora, que en siete de ellos se asociaba con datos de miopatía. Conclusiones. En enfermos críticos con debilidad intensa, las alteraciones miopáticas en el estudio neurofisiológico son mucho más frecuentes que la afectación neuropática. En concordancia con estos hallazgos, las alteraciones miopáticas en la biopsia muscular son manifiestas y abundantes. Los datos histopatológicos y neurofisiológicos de esta serie no sustentan una hipotética neuropatía axonal motora pura (AU)

Introduction. Critical illness patients may show marked weakness acquired in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). There are some disagreements about the myopathic versus neuropathic damage in this condition, presumably due to the lack of reliable diagnostic criteria. Aims. To report the neurophysiological findings in critical patients, to classify them in groups according to the electrophysiological data of myopathy, and to ascertain the rapport between the neurophysiological classification of myopathy and the muscle biopsy results. Patients and methods. A prospective assessment of 33 ICU patients with marked weakness by means of needle electromyography, electroneurography, and percutaneous muscle biopsy was carried out. Direct muscle stimulation was performed in 9 patients and repetitive nerve stimulation in 14 cases. Results. According to neurophysiological criteria, patients were classified in 3 groups: definite (33%), probable (46%), and uncertain (21%) myopathy. The most conspicuous myopathic pathological findings including fibrillar atrophy and necrosis,vacuoles, and myosin and mitochondrial anomalies, were observed in both, definite and probable groups (26 patients). In 17 of these cases, low amplitude of the compound motor action potentials and normal sensory nerve action potentials were found. Axonal sensory-motor neuropathy was present in 11 patients, concomitant with neurophysiological data of myopathy in 7 cases. Conclusions. Based on the neurophysiological criteria for the assessment and classification of acquired weakness in critically ill patients, myopathy is highly predominant over the neuropathic impairment. Histopathological findings are closely related to the electrophysiological diagnosis of myopathy. Neither neurophysiological nor pathological data support a hypothetic motor axonal neuropathy in this series (AU)

Effectiveness of treatments for severe sepsis: a prospective, multicenter, observational study.

RATIONALE: Several Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines recommendations are reevaluated. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the effectiveness of treatments recommended in the sepsis guidelines. METHODS: In a prospective observational study, we studied all adult patients with severe sepsis from 77 intensive care units. We recorded compliance with four therapeutic goals (central venous pressure 8 mm Hg or greater for persistent hypotension despite fluid resuscitation and/or lactate greater than 36 mg/dl, central venous oxygen saturation 70% or greater for persistent hypotension despite fluid resuscitation and/or lactate greater than 36 mg/dl, blood glucose greater than or equal to the lower limit of normal but less than 150 mg/dl, and inspiratory plateau pressure less than 30 cm H(2)O for mechanically ventilated patients) and four treatments (early broad-spectrum antibiotics, fluid challenge in the event of hypotension and/or lactate greater than 36 mg/dl, low-dose steroids for septic shock, drotrecogin alfa [activated] for multiorgan failure). The primary outcome measure was hospital mortality. The effectiveness of each treatment was estimated using propensity scores. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 2,796 patients, 41.6% died before hospital discharge. Treatments associated with lower hospital mortality were early broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment (treatment within 1 hour vs. no treatment within first 6 hours of diagnosis; odds ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.90; P = 0.008) and drotrecogin alfa (activated) (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.84; P = 0.004). Fluid challenge and low-dose steroids showed no benefits. CONCLUSIONS: In severe sepsis, early administration of broad-spectrum antibiotics in all patients and administration of drotrecogin alfa (activated) in the most severe patients reduce mortality.

Improvement in process of care and outcome after a multicenter severe sepsis educational program in Spain.

CONTEXT: Concern exists that current guidelines for care of patients with severe sepsis and septic shock are followed variably, possibly due to a lack of adequate education. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a national educational program based on the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines affected processes of care and hospital mortality for severe sepsis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Before and after design in 59 medical-surgical intensive care units (ICUs) located throughout Spain. All ICU patients were screened daily and enrolled if they fulfilled severe sepsis or septic shock criteria. A total of 854 patients were enrolled in the preintervention period (November-December 2005), 1465 patients during the postintervention period (March-June 2006), and 247 patients during the long-term follow-up period 1 year later (November-December 2006) in a subset of 23 ICUs. INTERVENTION: The educational program consisted of training physicians and nursing staff from the emergency department, wards, and ICU in the definition, recognition, and treatment of severe sepsis and septic shock as outlined in the guidelines. Treatment was organized in 2 bundles: a resuscitation bundle (6 tasks to begin immediately and be accomplished within 6 hours) and a management bundle (4 tasks to be completed within 24 hours). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hospital mortality, differences in adherence to the bundles' process-of-care variables, ICU mortality, 28-day mortality, hospital length of stay, and ICU length of stay. RESULTS: Patients included before and after the intervention were similar in terms of age, sex, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score. At baseline, only 3 process-of-care measurements (blood cultures before antibiotics, early administration of broad-spectrum antibiotics, and mechanical ventilation with adequate inspiratory plateau pressure) we had compliance rates higher than 50%. Patients in the postintervention cohort had a lower risk of hospital mortality (44.0% vs 39.7%; P = .04). The compliance with process-of-care variables also improved after the intervention in the sepsis resuscitation bundle (5.3% [95% confidence interval [CI], 4%-7%] vs 10.0% [95% CI, 8%-12%]; P < .001) and in the sepsis management bundle (10.9% [95% CI, 9%-13%] vs 15.7% [95% CI, 14%-18%]; P = .001). Hospital length of stay and ICU length of stay did not change after the intervention. During long-term follow-up, compliance with the sepsis resuscitation bundle returned to baseline but compliance with the sepsis management bundle and mortality remained stable with respect to the postintervention period. CONCLUSIONS: A national educational effort to promote bundles of care for severe sepsis and septic shock was associated with improved guideline compliance and lower hospital mortality. However, compliance rates were still low, and the improvement in the resuscitation bundle lapsed by 1 year.